The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.11256 of 2023 Buti Amnath Petitioner Mr. Tara Prasad Mohapatra, Adv. …. State of Odisha -versus- …. Opposite Party Mr.Gyana Ranjan Mohapatra, ASC CORAM: DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No.
Decision
ORDER 03.11.2023 Dated Police Station F.I.R. No. 13 20.01.2020 Orkel Sections Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act. Case No. and Courts’ Name T.R. No. 18 2020 of pending in the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, Malkangiri 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Nov-2023 17:59:27 learned counsel for the State. Page 1 of 6 // 2 // 3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with P.S. Case No.13/2020 corresponding to T.R. Case No.18/2020 pending in the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act has filed this petition for his release on bail. 4. It is alleged in the FIR that on 19.01.2020 when the S.I. of Police of Orkel P.S. named Niladri Charan Biswal along with his staff was performing evening patrolling as well as blocking duty on the road connecting to M.V. 51 and Surlokonda Hata, near village M.V. 51, they found the present accused person along with others transporting contraband Ganja by KAUDI. S.I. of Police along with staff also apprehended the present accused and co-accused persons while transporting contraband Ganja, but some others had escaped by taking advantage of darkness in the night. S.I. of Police also seized 1692 Kgs. and 600 grams of contraband Ganja. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that out of total seized contraband i.e. 1692 Kgs. and 600 grams only 40 kg. 500 grams has been seized from the possession of the Petitioner. The Petitioner is languishing in custody Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Nov-2023 17:59:27 since 20.01.2020, which is around three years. Page 2 of 6 // 3 // 6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail prayer of the Petitioner. 7. The Supreme Court has held that right to have speedy trial is a fundamental right of a citizen. Hence, keeping a person in custody for such a long time without any trial is not justified and violative of his fundamental right. The importance of speedy trial has been emphasized in the case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. vs Home Secretary, State of Bihar, wherein the Supreme Court has iterated that: "Speedy trial is, as held by us in our earlier judgment dated 26th February, 1979, an essential ingredient of ’reasonable, fair and just" procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the accused. The State cannot be permitted to deny the constitutional right of speedy trial to the accused on the ground that the State has no adequate financial resources to incur the necessary expenditure needed for improving the administrative and judicial apparatus with a view to ensuring speedy trial." further argues the period of that 8. He long incarceration suffered, which entitle the Petitioner for grant of bail. Right to Speedy trial is a fundamental right of an under trial prisoner and this observations have been resonated, time and again, in several judgments including Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Nov-2023 17:59:27 Page 3 of 6 // 4 // that of Kadra Pahadiya & Ors. v. State of Bihar1 wherein it has been stated that the obligation of the State or the complainant, as the case may be, to proceed with the case with reasonable promptitude. Particularly, in a country like ours, where the large majority of the accused come from poorer and weaker sections of the society and are not versed with laws and after face the dearth of competent legal advice, the application of the said NDPS Rule is wholly inadvisable. Of course, in a given case, if an accused demands speedy trial and yet he is not given one, may be a relevant factor in his favour. But an accused cannot be disentitled from complaining of infringement of his right to speedy trial on the ground that he did not ask for or insist upon a speedy trial. 9. The Supreme Court has also held in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)2 that incarceration has further deleterious effects where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Nov-2023 17:59:27 1 1981)3 SCC 671 2 SLP (Crl.) No. 915 of 2023 Page 4 of 6 // 5 // irreparable), and ensure that trials - especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily. 10. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and since 40 kg. 500 grams has been seized from the possession of the Petitioner out of total seized contraband i.e. 1692 Kgs. and 600 grams, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail. Accordingly, it is directed that the court in seisin over the matter shall release the Petitioner on bail in the aforesaid case on stringent terms and conditions with further conditions that: i. ii. iii. iv. v. the Petitioner shall furnish two local sureties for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) each, out of which one shall be his relative or friend. he shall appear before the learned trial court on each date of posting of the case; the Petitioner shall not criminal activity in future; the Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner; the Petitioner shall report before the local Police Station on every alternate Sunday in between 10A.M. to 1.P.M. till completion of the trial; indulge in any Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Nov-2023 17:59:27 Page 5 of 6 // 6 // 11. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. Judge (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Ayaskanta Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Nov-2023 17:59:27 Page 6 of 6